- Original Message -
From: David Jencks [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 5:23 AM
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] EJB's as Xmbeans?
I want to remove the current anomoly that calling say start on an mbean
directly bypasses the dependency checking
On 2002.10.03 02:00:12 -0400 Scott M Stark wrote:
Really? You want 2 complete sets of interceptor definititions with
exactly
the same functionality?
I don't. The whole ejb interceptor layer should be deprecated if not
replaced
in 4.0.
1. change all the ejb interceptors so they
all that is needed is init, start, stop, destroy
On Thu, 3 Oct 2002, David Jencks wrote:
proposed mbean interceptor:
create
start
stop
destroy
setMBeanInvoker //not sure of name, this is like setContainer.
getNext
insert or setNext
invoke
Now, this is an mbean stack, so there needs
?
Scott Stark
Chief Technology Officer
JBoss Group, LLC
- Original Message -
From: David Jencks [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 5:23 AM
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] EJB's as Xmbeans?
I want to remove
We've claimed for a long time that in JBoss ejb's are mbeans.
Well, they sort of are, but the container is the mbean, and
it calls an interceptor chain and ends up maybe doing
something with one of a bunch of objects from a cache or pool.
Meanwhile the mbeans have their own interceptor
On 2002.10.03 00:29:14 -0400 marc fleury wrote:
We've claimed for a long time that in JBoss ejb's are mbeans.
Well, they sort of are, but the container is the mbean, and
it calls an interceptor chain and ends up maybe doing
something with one of a bunch of objects from a cache or
Really? You want 2 complete sets of interceptor definititions with exactly
the same functionality?
I don't. The whole ejb interceptor layer should be deprecated if not replaced
in 4.0.
1. change all the ejb interceptors so they only have an
invoke method, no invokeHome. The kind of
